click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBC 11
MSNBCW 11
CSPAN 9
LANGUAGE
English 36
Search Results 0 to 35 of about 36 (some duplicates have been removed)
in washington, d.c. that can do sunday shows? john mccain would be good. >> yeah, he's 234not going to v for him. at the earliest, it won't happen until lawmakers return to washington next week after a ten-day recess. senator john mccain, one of hagel's most outspoken critics, pushed back against suggestions that his opposition was meant to settle old scores. >> is it payback time for chuck hagel? that's what this process has amounted to? >> of course not. 99% of it is to do with the positions that senator hagel has taken. the positions he's taken on various issues has frankly been not only out of the mainstream but far to the left. we will have a vote when we get back, and i'm confident that senator hagel will probably have the votes necessary to be confirmed as the secretary of defense. we have an obligation of advice and consent. i don't intend to give those up when other senators continue to have reasonable questions. i mean reasonable. >> but you're not a yes vote for your old friend? >> no, i don't believe he's qualified, but i don't believe that we should hold up his nomination any furthe
to senate republicans particularly john mccain sent with their treatment of hague snell. >> i think actually it was a long memory from people who had to work with chuck hagel over the years, alex. i think a lot of people who didn't say then senator hagel and sometimes his treatment of witnesses at the stand, people that had to go before him and be questioned by chuck hagel were not surprised by this kind of grilling. also, remember chuck hagel spent a lot of time telling people they were wrong or they were immoral in some of the decisions that they made. and this was some payback for him for that type of stance towards others in both colleagues and people who had to testify before his committees. >> yeah. and i mean, there are those who -- john mccain, shall we say, he's probably going to be upset that chuck hagel was there supporting president obama when they were running against one another. you get that. but this is a pretty serious job, tony. this is defense secretary. i mean, do you think that kind of politics, those maybe personal issues should be brought up under these circumstances?
, valued friend of so many years, john mccain. and the leadership of this committee throughout my 30 years of the senate has been drawn from the ranks of the strongest and the best of this membership. we have it today, and i have every reason to believe we will have it tomorrow. i have a very fortunate record of public service for many years. no chapter was more important than my service on this committee. you will carry with you the rest of your life the recollections of the work you have done for one of america's most valued assets, the men and women and their families of the armed services of the united states. i had written out a nice, long statement, and then last night, i got sam nunn's statement and chuck hagel's statement, and i felt that another statement would not do. i would rather say a few words from the heart. i was in the navy. i did no more than any other kid on my block. we all went. good friends, we thank chuck hagel and mrs. hagel and his family. because if confirmed, is an enormous commitment by the family to this position. you have made the decision to offer yourself o
because it's not fair, but the republican young breed aren't even as cool as john mccain. mccain is pretty cool as a personality. these guys, this new crowd. the key word in what john mccain said there was another, another cudgel. >> yeah. >> there's been -- in other words, the democrats have had the upper hand now for weeks now, if not months, and he's just saying -- when he said they've got more cudgels to beat us up with, that told me everything. >> it's even better because the president to some extent stands on the sidelines while they self-cudgel. they're beating themselves up. >> i think that's a six -- >> the president i'm perhaps belatedly coming to realize is really deft at using the outside game, which is how he started, social media, et cetera, using public sentiment and the outside game to pressure the congress without doing it himself directly in a way that divides the other party and forces them to come to him. he makes them come to him because -- he's for the most part hands off. we're saying why isn't he lbj or lincoln? that's not how this president operates. he operates wi
did not stop there. john mccain held him accountable for not supporting the surge in iraq. >> in an interview 2011, in an interview with the financial times you said i disagreed with the president obama his decision to surge in iraq as i did with president bush on the surge in iraq. do you stand by those comments, senator hagel? >> senator, i stand by them because i made them. >> were you correct in your assessment? >> what i would refer to the judgment of history. >> deserves your judgment whether you were right or wrong about the surge? >> i'll explain why i made those comments. >> i want to whether or not they were right or wrong? >> the surge assisted in the objective. if we review the record. >> please answer the question. were you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam, were you correct or incorrect? >> my reference to -- >> the question is were you right or wrong. that is a pretty straightforward question. i would like you to answer whether you were right or wrong and free to
clinton, john mccain, joe biden, and newt gingrich were falling all over themselves to express their support for israel. the only exception to that rule was senator chuck hagel. i don't have anything to go with that with what you might have said but -- some of the concerns -- i used to say when i was the whip in the house you can count on the house and the senate to be among other thing, always pro-israel. i think that is the main stream of our views. i've seen a number of times that you've said you can be pro-israel but that does not mean you have to be for everything that israel is for. they are what they are. they are reported from comments that you made that are out of the context of the other comments. also, earlier today, i asked you about the bloated pentagon. you said that -- those comments were before the sequestration bill passed. they were after the bill passed. sequestration passed on august 2 and the interview was on august 29. what you said on august 29 of -- in that "financial times" interview you said "the defense department, i think -- this is your quote "the d
there is a possibility of direct talks with iran. republican senator john mccain telling reuters he would have no objection to direct talks, but questioned how much these with cheese -- would achieve its fundamental questions about the iranian nuclear program are unresolved. [video clip] >> our policy is not containment. it is to prevent iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. we have also made clear that the iranian leaders need not sentence their people to economic isolation. there is still time and space for diplomacy, backed by pressure, to succeed. the ball is in the government of iran's courts. host: if we were able to begin negotiations with iran and its intentions for to ease between the u.s. in iran, which became a huge problem to present jimmy carter in 1979 with the hostage situation, if we make progress, how would that use the entire neighborhood and countries around iran and afghanistan? guest: it depends on how the israelis interpret this. the israelis believe they have more to fear about iran's nuclear capabilities and the rest of the name of the. i have read -- than the rest of t
sub marines just to our 50. even john mccain who was quite critical in the hearing said this nomination should go through. >> right. >> well, yeah. on that point, it looks like the nomination will be confirmed. the problem is it loonlgs like there's a filibuster or attempt at a filibuster and that means democrats and the white house have to come up with 60 votes to get this through. mccain has indicated to break a filibuster. looks like they would have the votes to do that. do you think we have sort of crossed a line here, bad precedent set for future cabinet nominations? never before has there been a filibuster of a defense secretary nominee. only two rejected since 1959. nobody tried to filibuster one in that time. are we creating bad precedent? >> why the senate has the right as a senator said who is supporting senator hagel to do a filibuster. i think it would set a bad precedent because as many people often very conservative have said in this particular case, the president has the right to have who he wants as cabinet secretary as long as there's nothing egregious i
that did not harm but would gather information. this administration ran against john mccain saying, even though john mccain agreed, yeah, we don't want to water board, we don't want to do anything that somebody might someday call torture, they complained, gee, this is allowing radicals to be recruited against the united states because of the unjust nature of doing a procedure that's not harmful to someone's health, to gather information to save american lives, which it did. here we are now with this administration that thought waterboarding helped jeeyaddists -- jihadists recruit more radicals using a process of having a high administration official think to himself or herself, i don't think this may be enough. blow them up. without giving adequate consideration to civilians who will be killed, to family members who will be upset, to the ability of our enemies to use that to recruit other radicals, many times over, to replace those that have been killed with a drone strike. this administration's systemic failure to understand what the muslim brotherhood calls, quote, civilization jihad,
. take vietnam. i will never forget standing next to john mccain in the east room of the white house. each of us on either side of president clinton as he announced the once unthinkable normalization of our relations with vietnam, and efforts that john mccain and i worked on for about 10 years to try do. in the last decade, thanks in large part to the work of usaid, our exports to vietnam increased by more than 700%. every one of those percentage points our jobs here in america. in the last two decades, 1000 vietnamese students and scholars have studied spanish and taught -- have studied and taught in america through the fulbright program, including the foreign minister, who i just talked to the other day and who has feelings about america because of that engagement. the list goes on. as the emerging middle class in india, the world's largest democracy, buys our products, that means jobs and incomes for our own middle-class. as our traditional assistance to brazil and decreases, trade there is increasing. brazil is one of the new tigers moving at a double-digit pace. it supports addi
, john mccain's changing his tune. we praised him yesterday. so he had to reverse course, i guess. so now he's talking about possibly delaying chuck hagel's nomination. and also wayne lapierre. this is very important. because if you look at the profiles of all the people that committed these mass murders in newtown and aurora and across -- virginia tech, they are all hispanic drug gang leaders. and that's exactly what wayne lapierre said in an op-ed that americans need to buy guns because those latin americans are coming to america, and they're going to kill you people. this is who a lot of republicans in congress are thinking about falling off -- don't do it. don't hurt our party anymore. let wayne lapierre go wherever he wants to go. he's going to destroy the party. we're going to talk about the crazy op-ed has horrible for our party's image, horrible for the conservative movement's image, goes against everything ronald reagan stood for. we'll talk about that in a minute. first, breaking news. this is bizarre. the feel-good story of the olympic games involved in possibly murder. >> this
colleagues, including senator john mccain. that exchange is about an hour and a half into the hearing. later, we will get your thoughts about the nomination and hearing on our phone lines at 11:00 p.m. eastern, 8:00 pacific. carl levin chairs the armed services committee and makes the opening statement. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> good morning, everybody. the committee meets today to consider the nomination of former senator chuck hagel to be secretary of defense. before i begin, i want to first welcome senator inhofe as the new ranking republican on our committee, succeeding senator mccain. senator mccain has been a great partner over the past six years, and i thank him for all the work he has done to get bills enacted, his leadership on a host of issues, his support for the work of this committee, and for always keeping our hearings likely. -- lively. senator inhofe has shown his strong commitment to the national defense over his 20 years on this committee. and i know that we are going to work well toge
" is on sunday at 10:00 p.m. earn. -- eastern. >> john mccain's 2000 campaign when he ran for president was the most memorable that i've ever covered. we'll never see it again. here he was facing george w. bush who had the republican party backing him and the three republican governors and new hampshire and all the money and john mccain went out and held 114 town meetings. he stayed there until every question was answered. you saw the light bulb go over people's heads. as long as my party is owned by the insurance companies. next question. it was this refreshing candor. you see in the people's responses. then he was open to the press. i mean, it because candor and openness and a welcomeness that no one had seen before and no one had seen since. >> political analyst mark shields on his career in politics and the washington press corps sunday night at 8:00 on c-span's "ea a. >> a baurp grout of senators outline their plan for changing the immigration laws. >> i would like to thank their willingness to host this event and i hope you look into the opportunities they offer to young professio
. and the gop is losing latino support. john mccain got 31%. romney only got 27%. i suspect that rubio is not only being used for his talents. >> i think the republicans are trying to rebrand this. but let's look at rubio's numbers. rubio, among the latinos in florida, he overwhelmingly won the cuban vote. but he didn't win the rest of the latino vote. when you look at history where he actually looks at, he attacks, for example, private education. and i think, again, that's the only way you're going to win the latino vote is to start talking to them straight. >> is he a leading contender for 2016. and does this further embellish if he does well on tuesday night? >> again, they're reintroducing the brand. and he's the headliner for that. he can't backtrack like he did so quickly on immigration. >> so on climate change and a lot of things, he's all over the place. >> he basically has to identify the problem with the republican party. i also encourage him to start talking a little bit about he keeps saying he doesn't believe in govt entitlement programs. unfortunately, right now, the gove
:30. >> bill: if they call a filibuster and john mccain said he would not support a filibuster, it looks like there would be 60 votes to stop the filibuster. >> that's right. >> bill: can you stop -- do you know, can you stop a hold? if inhoff puts a hold on, that's not a filibuster. that's a different animal, right? >> it's a delay. it's a delay tactic. so i think it merely pushes it off into the future. >> bill: but my understanding one senator can put a hold on somebody's nomination and until that senator agrees to lift it, there's nothing the other senators can do. is that correct? >> we saw that a lot with coburn putting a hold on everything, on legislation, on spending legislation. the pressure here will be fairly remarkable. >> bill: to go along without a secretary of defense. >> i think pressure from the pentagon, military leaders the public not having a guy in charge of the pentagon. it's not going to be sustainable for them. >> bill: the center for american progress has a lot of ties to the white house. so you're going to be live blogging tonight. what does that mean? >> he's going
'm reading it. i want to. yes. when the soviets like john mccain tells you you belch too much, soak and spew too much fire, you know you've got a problem. >> she likes it. that's a bad day. that's a bad day. >> this is not painful for her. >> like three, four days later, she's still laughing. >> when someone says something about you, that's a bad day. ted cruz, a republican freshman in the senate out front and center in his republicans' efforts to josh chuck hagel has a problem. he's an honoree piece of work, just six weeks from arrival, he's already known for nay saying and his nitpicking and his itch to upbraid lawmakers who are vastly senior to him who have sacrificed more than he has and who deserve a measure of respect. or at least courtesy that isn't his me kirks er. he was head of the harvard debate team. >> princeton or harvard. >> a very bright guy. >> a little too big for his britches. >> people that knew him before said you would like him. >> he has been kicking shins, being comparely rude and i guess maybe it's all a marketing ploy to raise the most money among conservatives nati
, and on the senate side, you definitely see some of those were traditional republicans like senator john mccain, snorkeenator kelly ayotte of ne hampshire where we can't make the defense cuts clear. there's a divide, and it's unclear exactly how they're going to bridge the gap there. >> dana, this divide, how dangerous is it for an entire party that's really trying to reinvent itself after the november loss. >> it is a pretty serious one. you see a lot of the green eye shades republicans here in washington aren't listening to the governors. the more popular officials and their party saying, look, it's important to rein in spending. that can't be the sole label for this party. when you have so many washington republicans saying the budget cut is even more important than national defense, there seems to be -- i think we're finally reaching a level where there is some push-back. and so there is a more serious division than had occurred in the past when it was all about budget cutting. >> do you think, lauren, we're going to get a final deal on sequestration, or are they going to kick the can down
. it is my honor to introduce senator john mccain, who needs no introduction. >> but he always appreciate it. [laughter] i thank senator enhofe for his attention tot his issue. he pointed out the devastating effect of sequestration. if it is implemented, it will cut every ship, truck, a tank, research and development across the board. the secretary of defense panetta, a man that i admire greatly, called sequestration a meat ax approach. i think it is important to note, according to one economic analysis, it costs a loss of $350 in full-time direct jobs, 650,000 indirect job losses. that is a lot of jobs. in these difficult times. secretary panetta said, "this has become a very serious threat to our national security." para chairman of the joint chiefs of staff says the same thing. in the late 1970's, after the vietnam war, the chief of staff testified before congress that we had a "hollow army," which then caused the attention of the american people and one of the reasons why ronald reagan was elected to be president of the united states, because of our rapid decline in national defense that
john mccain, who needs no introduction. >> but he always appreciate it. [laughter] i thank senator enhofe for his attention tot his issue. he pointed out the devastating effect of sequestration. if it is implemented, it will cut every ship, truck, a tank, research and development across the board. the secretary of defense panetta, a man that i admire greatly, called sequestration a meat ax approach. i think it is important to note, according to one economic analysis, it costs a loss of $350 in full-time direct jobs, 650,000 indirect job losses. that is a lot of jobs. in these difficult times. secretary panetta said, "this has become a very serious threat to our national security." para chairman of the joint chiefs of staff says the same thing. in the late 1970's, after the vietnam war, the chief of staff testified before congress that we had a "hollow army," which then caused the attention of the american people and one of the reasons why ronald reagan was elected to be president of the united states, because of our rapid decline in national defense that took place previously. we h
john mccain and jeff flake, the two senators from arizona, having to sort of go back and forth and back and forth and slowly move their constituents along. and the way they do that is by talking tough on the border. >> yes. and this is politics playing out. right after the election, even sean hannity said well, maybe i'm for some kind of a border thing. the people in the republican party voting in these republican primaries, they're not sold on this. and i think senator mccain found that when he went back to arizona. it's going to happen time and time again. and they do have to bring them along. >> it's going to be tough in louisiana, too, isn't it? >> very. >> mary landrieu. is mary, the democratic senator, going to talk about we need immigration reform? >> i'll let her speak for herself. the argument to make is you're rewarding people out of here illegally. that's not what you should do. there are many arguments against that that i agree with. she's right, the border, for whatever reason, it might be because of our economy. it might be because of increased security. it might be becaus
Search Results 0 to 35 of about 36 (some duplicates have been removed)